LETTERS IN THE EDITOR'S MAILBAG.

Byline: The Register-Guard

Confessions of a disloyal lunatic

I must concede to the right, persuaded by the iron logic of their arguments, that I am a stupid, disloyal, extremist, lunatic, loser who should "get over it."

Stupid? Yes, because I just can't agree that ideology is more important in judging reality than scientific fact.

Disloyal? Yes, because I don't believe that the Fuhrer Prinzip (`the leader is always right') is conducive to democracy, granting a God-like infallibility to folks who are just as prone to error as, say, a Democrat.

Extremist? Again, guilty. I can't lose the image of a terrified Bush scurrying from hidey-hole to hidey-hole on Sept. 11, "Mission Accomplished" photo-op notwithstanding.

Lunatic? Only a lunatic would be outraged that $11 million payments a court ruled Iraq should pay to soldiers tortured during the first Gulf War have been diverted, on direct presidential order, to pay for reconstruction contracts to firms such as Halliburton.

Loser? You bet! Instead of dodging the draft like Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, John Ashcroft, Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly, I served in the Army. Compounding my folly, it never occurred to me to desert, as did our current commander-in-chief. I guess that makes me a double loser.

And, as for "getting over it," I suppose I really should follow the examples of Newt Gingrich, Dan Burton and the scrupulously honest conservative media mavens, all of whom (if memory serves) graciously accepted the fact that the Democrats won the 1992 and 1996 presidential elections.

JAMIE SELKO

Eugene

More power to the judges

Al Ratledge (letters, Dec. 25) asks whether we would rather keep long-standing traditions of expressing Christian holidays and teachings in public places and courts or maintain the services of judges supporting a "little crowd of complainers."

Radical Christian sects of the 16th and 17th centuries must have been regarded as "chronic complainers" by the conservative majorities in favor of maintaining the status quo and as much worse by the state religions of European nations. Some of these complainers escaped persecution by emigrating to North America. This persecution was not forgotten by a later generation of complainers when they notified the majority of their independence and founded a new nation. The writers of the Constitution insisted that the power of the state should not be paired with any religion.

More power to complainers and judges continuing the work needed to uphold the Constitution and insure that the United States does not have a state religion, either officially or in practice.

Ratledge takes on an ominous, undemocratic (and unchristian) tone when he says "we can do without these judges" and complainers and suggests some kind of changes "so these complainers won't have a platform from which to harass the majority."

I believe and I hope that Ratledge is in the minority with these threats, as most Americans support the democratic ideal - asserted by the Declaration of Independence and made law by the Constitution - that all voices have a right to be heard.

JOE WAYMAN

Eugene

A lesson in double standards

I've been waiting for somebody to tell the truth about the late Sen. Strom Thurmond, and there the editors were on the editorial page (Register-Guard, Dec. 24). All the editorial was lacking was a quote from Trent Lott - but that was columnist David Broder's job, not the editors'.

The Boston public school curriculum didn't teach me about double standards, but since 1956, I've been getting a few clues.

PETE ROBERTS

Eugene